>Ginny said "Oral history might be considered a record - it would fall under history or archival records.  Most native or first nation tribes have a tradition of oral history rather than fully documented history."
>
>Glenn Sanderson -I would agree that a story being passed on by sound (Voice) would be a third medium, beyond that I am still thinking.

Intro: Tom Owens, CRM.  Over 20 years in Records Management.

Comments: While sound is certainly a medium that is used to communicate information between sender and receiver, I'm not sure it can be called a record. 

Oral history is not recorded.  That is what makes it oral. Only after it is written down and preserved is it a record.  I'm not sure how you would maintain an oral history without preservation in another medium.
Oral traditions are not permanent.  They change constantly over time as different story tellers embellish, change or add elements to the central tradition.
Oral exchanges have very limited value as evidence. There are limits to what is allowed in court as legal evidence, because of the basic inaccuracy of the sound communications process.

So I think I have to rule against pure oral as a record.  Sound recordings, sure, but not purely sound.

Tom Owens
Consultant, Records & Info Services
[log in to unmask]

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
To unsubscribe from this list, click the below link. If not already present, place UNSUBSCRIBE RECMGMT-L or UNSUB RECMGMT-L in the body of the message.
mailto:[log in to unmask]